About your Search

20121128
20121206
STATION
MSNBCW 8
KQED (PBS) 2
CNNW 1
KCSM (PBS) 1
KTVU (FOX) 1
LANGUAGE
English 21
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21 (some duplicates have been removed)
's right. joe lieberman is conservative, a hawk, respected by some senators on foreign policy issues. there may be three republican senators who don't like her, another 97 who have votes, the house members who have been campaigning against her don't have votes. something chip said, it would be weird or odd for this process to be playing out if she is not going to be nominated as secretary of state. chip, it shows i think a real political premise on your part, and i think unfortunately shared by so much of your party here, she's a cabinet-level foreign policy person. so if you're serious about any of these issues, it shouldn't matter whether she's nominated or not. you should care about the substance of it. secondly, you and your party come to this debate with big deficit because you and president bush and dick cheney lied this country into war and you had a lot of lies on foreign policy about wmds. president bush even said once in may 2003 that we found the wmds in iraq. dick cheney and condoleezza rice talked about links to al qaeda in iraq. you've never made up for those huge, seri
to you want to close? [laughter] >> let me go back to susan rice did in terms of our foreign policy, everybody agrees that hillary clinton has done a fine job -- almost everybody, i guess. >> what exactly has she done right? >> in terms of making policy -- >> you don't think she was that good? >> i think she was a nice presents but i don't see her fingerprints -- >> if you ask me what and we kissinger did, i can tell you. what did she do? >> do we have a dissenting point of view? >> she did a huge number of things, she quieted down more near catastrophes that you can imagine -- >> name on. >> may ii finish? she has done an enormous amount for women. most people did not have the rights that i do on this program to hit you upside the head when i think we're wrong, charles. that would get me killed most places. >> if that is your case, i rest my. >> i think the foreign policy of president obama and secretary clinton has been successful. i take it is hard to argue with that. i think that hillary clinton as the engineer, if not architect of a good part of that, and the turn to it a shot
foreign policy views. gwen: and he was close to chris stevens, the ambassador. >> i think there's a lot of personal feelings there. gwen: how much of it is about what the u.n. ambassador said on a talk show and how much of this is about what the intelligence department didn't do and what the state department didn't do? >> you're 100% right. i mean, i talked to republicans this week about this, and foreign policy expert republicans, who say why are we picking this fight? what we need to be asking is did the intelligence community decide to use the different language because they were playing politics, or did they not know? we've heard that general petraeus said that he immediately assumed that this was a terror attack from al qaeda. so the question is this republican said to me, why are we making this about her? this needs to be about something bigger that is actually bigger than susan rice. did we get it wrong? did we pay no attention to it because there was an election? i mean, those are very important issues that of course -- >> and didn't it feed those suspicions when after they had
, the republican party for vice president and president nominated candidates who not only had zero foreign policy between them but no coherent policy whatsoever about what to do about the war and didn't mention it. while we have 66,000 americans in that war right now. we have serious things to make serious decisions about as a country. how do we turn down the nonsense enough to hope that our political process can be the means by which we make these grave and serious decisions? joining now is senator jeff merkley of oregon, chief sponsor of the amendment that passed calling on an accelerated withdrawal of u.s. forces from afghanistan. senator merkley, congratulations on the success of that amendment today. >> thank you very much, rachel. it's an incredible amount of things happening around the world today. >> yeah. i feel like this is one of those moments when i have very high hopes and very high wishes for what our political process will be capable of doing, and i have to say, seeing your amendment passed today in such a bipartisan fashion with so much republican support made me have some hope th
in the senate really has been his work in foreign relations, and in the area of foreign policy. i think the senate would be losing a giant in that record. i don't know how that directly impacts the state of massachusetts, but certainly it certainly is never good to lose a senator with that much seniority. >> what about senator patrick of massachusetts. what would happen here? he's got two years left in his term. he could run for senate if he left, i don't know if he'd have to step down, or he might even leave to go to a cabinet post. do you think scott brown might run for governor? >> i think he would be better advised to run for governor. now there's also talk and this being massachusetts where the democrats run everything and there are about 11 republicans left to complain, there's talk that they might 15 finagle the rules again that he's not old school democratic enough to do that. there was rumblings in the boston her and would that said that there was some talk on beacon hill that the democrats the legislature might go back to the old system that they changed so that mitt romney wo
, the person he thinks will best help him shape and project this country's foreign policy. just as important, the senate has the duty to advise and consent to his decision. if senators see a serious problem with a nominee, they have a right and duty to speak and vote that way. someone keeps telling the press that president obama prefers to nominate u.n. ambassador susan rice, and as long as that person is not the president and does so under ground rules that protect his or her identity, we are condemned to this preventative war we're watching in washington. one side attacking while no one outside the gates of the white house knows what the president intends. i take president obama at his official word. he has not decided whose name to send to the senate, and with that we go to the first of our two senatorial guests, senator bob corker, republican of tennessee. senator corker, i have laid it out as best i can. you senators have a right and a duty to decide, to advise and consent or not to a president's nominee. isn't this strange that we're having the debate about the qualifications for a can
because of a foreign policy decision. the wars weren't going to be fought. you aren't really saving money. it's a budget gimmick but it's not money you were going to spend. >> no, it's not a budget gimmick. the republicans propose it as a budget gimmick? >> sure, absolutely. >> then you should address it to them. >> but i'm addressing it to you. >> it's a basic challenge we face. this is the challenge we face which is how to bring the deficits down over time. it will require spending, savings and increase in rates and revenues. we think we can do that. we will work hard to do that and we have a good chance do it. no reason we can't do it. >> last question. can you promise we will not go over the cliff? >> no, i can't promise that. that's a decision that lies in the hands of the republicans that are now opposing increases in tax rates. if they recognize reality that we can't afford to extend those tax rates, then we have the basis for an agreement to be very good for the american people. >> and the president bears no responsibility, it's all up to the republicans? >> chris, and yourself th
are no ending the wars for budget purposes but because of the foreign policy decision, the wars were not going to be fought and you are not really saving money, it is a budget gimmick, money -- >> no, it is not, when republicans propose it is a budget gimmick. >> chris: sure, absolutely. >> address it with them. >> chris: well, i'm addressing it with you. >> again, it is a basic challenge we face, chris, the challenge we face, which is how to bring the deficit down over time, now, it will require spending savings, it will require increasing in rates of revenues and we think we can do it and will work hard to do it and have a good chance to do it and no reason we can't. >> chris: last question, can you promise that we will not go over the cliff. >> no, i can't promise that. that is a decision that lies in the hands of the republicans, that are now opposing increases in tax rates, if they recognize the reality, that we cannot afford to extend the tax rates we have the basis for an agreement that would be good for the american people. >> chris: and the president bears no responsibility, it is all
's foreign policy and seldom the case a achievement or error by one of them endures forever. analysts say secretary clinton brought undeniable star power to her role as chief diplomat and used her unique status on the world stage and global rolodex to advance issues of concern to her. she is included gender equality, the environment, technology and social media and steering of resources to her department. yet on the great foreign policy challenge of her time clinton can point to only limited progress of kind could be expected in the post 9/11 world where tough sanctions on iran's oil and gas sector failed to check that regime's march towards nuclear weapon. where change in leadership in north korea produced know change in that rogue state's behavior and upheaval's of the arab spring hardly dampened the volatility of the middle east. one analyst who worked for six secretaries of state told fox news, hillary clinton will not enter the secretary of states hall of fame, he argues, her boss kept mrs. clinton on a short leash. >> issues regarding peace, war, iraq being afghanistan, war against
, the administration chose that particular foreign policy leader to go on sunday shows as opposed to other folks in the administration. my hunch is -- this is really just my guess. it isn't something i've coordinated. >> no talking points with the intelligence? >> no talking points. my view of it is that this was obviously a terrible incident where americans were killed. and there was clear sort of lack of full coordination and communication between elements of the executive branch. and they made a choice to have her be the sort of face forward for the administration on responding to questions about what had happened and why and when and where. i would be joining calls for an investigation and a joint committee and so forth if the administration were stonewalling and saying we won't be accountable for this. we won't tell you what happened. we won't get into the background. that's not been my experience. the senate foreign relations committee on which i serve unanimously sent a letter to the administration asking that we be briefe
that he has on foreign policy in the republican senate caucus? mika and i talked to so many people over the past two, three years that say we want, republican senators, we want out of afghanistan but, you know what, we just sort of stay out of john's way. how many times have we heard that? >> a lot. it's disturbing. >> we hear it all the time. they stay out of his way. are they going to blindly follow and, again, i love and respect senator mccain, but i don't want my party to blindly follow him over a cliff on this battle especially if it's a personal one. >> well, on this battle it may be a personal one. i think the answer to your broader question is that republicans will continue to respect and follow his advice and syria is the next big issue that he is pounding away on. he was at a forum at the museum yesterday and crying out for american leadership on syria which means more engagement, more involvement. so there are a lot of big issues that he has huge influence on because of his experiences, his personal history. this issue i'm not so sure they'll follow him on. two of the three s
this by you. i mean, isn't it part rice's personality the editor at large of foreign policy magazine describes rice this way, quote, she's not easy. i'm not sure i'd want to take her on a picnic with my family, but if the president wants her to be secretary of state, she'll work hard. this is from a reuters article. so is it in part that senators aren't used to dealing with a person -- i mean, susan rice just comes out and kind of says things. she's blunt. she's not charming, warm, etcetera. >> or maybe some might say diplomatic which you need for the role of secretary of state. you know, that might be part of it because, look, this is a club up here, a member of the club is somebody who wants that job. we're talking about senator john kerry who is the senate foreign relations chairman that might be sort of an under current here. i think the big issue when it comes to susan rice isn't so much her personality. it's that republican senators think that she is just too political. bob corker, who is meeting with her later this morning as well, he is a republican from tennessee, he said that she wou
. what can our current president of the united states learn from churchhill's foreign policy? >> one thing churchhill would not believe in leading from behind. he believed in telling the facts and then rallying the people around the facts. >> steve: yeah. >> and what he can learn in this book, not only his many prophecies was proved to be true. but that the way he arrived at these predictions. that process is a premer for presidential leadership. >> steve: you think that it a big mistake for president obama in his first term to return that famous bust of churchhill to the british and took it out of the white house. >> well he did it, yes. when it went there the night before. yes, he was awful rejecting the wisdom of churchhill he could listen to churchhill he would say the important thing is not to be popular, but to be respected. and churchhill did that. he told the people the truth. that's the reason he was a great prophet not only did he know history but he had the courage to deliver the unvarnished facts unlike spineless politician or burrcrats. >> steve: maybe the president coul
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21 (some duplicates have been removed)